Should the Height and Weight standards matter if they pass the physical fitness test??

I would be careful SSgt, logical and common sense thinking like that could get you thrown out of the Army.

SSgt Joseph Baptist I was in the Army when I created my account on this site.

Interesting idea, a sliding scale. And I actually did have a guy in my unit who was a PT nut. Made the 290's+ every Army APFT but would not have passed the H/W at any time. My thoughts were "so what", he passed by more than necessary and could do the MOS required skills. A sliding scale both ways could be an anawer.

SSgt Joseph Baptist so your right about one thing, I didn’t read your profile prior to my last comment. I just did however, and I am still unsure how you can comment on Special Operations standards. “Oh yeah,” you trained with them? My bad. Regardless of how you feel your retired which means your irrelevant. I’ll be there one day too. Just not today.

I had and have a love and hate relationship with H/W and Bodyfat Standards. I was that soldier that got on their PT Test over 285 and in ruckmarches came in 2:45 ish to 3:00 hours but when it came to get weighted failed every single time. I’m 5’3 weigh 152 and lift weights. Also whenever it was time to get taped that was also a problem why hips measurements should be even taken in consideration. Like you can tell when someone is actually taking care of themselves working out and doing things right from those who aren’t. If they pass the PT test with flying colors let them be.

Thank you. I agree that it is a waste of time. And yes, uniforms look ill-fitted and not militarily sharp.

What CSM said is 150% on point! If we we're more focused on meeting fitness standards, then none of us would be overweight in the first place. Plus, the fitness standards could also be raised if soldiers are still too fat or too skinny. Besides, most fat soldiers will skate around the H/W standards anyway. Same with PT tests... Soldiers will find ways to perpetually stay on profile to avoid PT at all costs.

MSG Danny Mathers

How many miles can a person run on the water?

I have seen guys who were within H/W who couldn't pass the APFT.

SGT Anna Kleinschmidt ma'am, I'm saddened this happened to you. But I praise you for sticking to the career you chose. Thank you for serving. And I agree with the uniform problem. They are made to look sloppy and unmilitary, which is to say not flattering.

MSG Danny Mathers good question.

The challenge is not as great as you might think, 1SG (Join to see). The first thing we do is get over the idea that body composition is a "unit" thing.

Now, consider that there are 46 Active Component Medical Clinics or Hospitals worldwide where the average Soldier would go for a PHA. Each Facility services around 11,000 Soldiers on average.

A BodPod test takes about 4.5 minutes, but let's apply a 25% fudge factor -- 6 minutes to test each Soldier. Now, figure that (with all the Holidays and DONSAs) each Medical Facility will have about 48 weeks of scheduled PHAs each year, 8 hours per day, 10 BodPod tests per hour....that's 19,200 tests per year per Medical Facility. ONE BodPod is sufficient, then, for each of the 46 facilities (at a minimum). Let's round that up to 80 BodPods to cover remote sites, et al. (just to be safe).

Admittedly, the RC is a bit more of a challenge, but we do not require a BodPod at EVERY single Armory. There are roughly 547,000 RC Soldiers who are required to complete a PHA as well -- including Hearing Checks. Does every Armory have a hearing Test Booth? Certainly not! In SOME cases, RC Soldiers may undergo a PHA at an AC facility (remember, we have 8,200 spare slots on the BodPod testing schedule at each AC facility). But even if the AC would NOT share it's toys, the RC can still make due.

Remember the Hearing Test Booths? The RC typically contracts with Medical Service Providers like LHI to conduct routine PHAs. LHI itself maintains a fleet of mobile, trailer mounted Hearing Test Booths it brings to scheduled Unit Mass Medical events. Each of the 547,000 Soldiers drills around 39 days per year (weekends), and there are typically around 2 weekends per month that are suitable for scheduled Battle Assemblies (incidental to the 2-week Annual Training period). So, a mobile PHA Team from a provider like LHI might schedule a little over 5 testing days per month for 10 hours each day. Figure in the 10 BodPod tests per hour, and that equates to 6,000 tests per Mobile Team per Year. To cover the total RC force, we'd need 92 more BodPods. Let's round that up to 100 just to be safe.

That's 180 BodPods -- force wide -- to test over a Million Soldiers every year concurrent with their PHA. At $13,500 per Unit, that's a little under $2.5 million.

Now, $2.5 million may seem like quite a lot of little plastic measuring tapes, but there is one other cost we need to consider. Since 2012, the US Army has chaptered around 100 to 1,000 or more per year. Now consider that each of these Soldier's cost at least $150,000 just to TRAIN (let alone recruit). That means we've thrown out $15 million to $150 million worth of trained, MOSQ Soldiers. Now, considering that the tape test is PROVEN to be wildly inaccurate, how many of these Soldiers were REALLY unfit for service? Let's say that around half are truly worthless POGs that should never have been allowed to sign up. That means -- per annum -- we've tossed out $7.5 million to 75 million who WERE fit! That's $75 million wasted -- per YEAR -- to a test that is known to be inaccurate.

Let's do a little 2nd Grade Math: Which of these figures is greater than the other? $7.5 million or $2.5 million? How about $75 million or $2.5 million?

1SG (Join to see) I've addressed that in the thread. We toss away 3 times what it would cost to obtain Bodpods in discharging allegedly "unfit" Soldiers from service using a wildly inaccurate measure for a subjective and ineffective ideal of physical fitness.

In other words, we recoup the costs in the first year through savings on recruitment and replacement of Soldiers we may never have had to rid ourselves of in the first place.

I've seen fat guys in Special Operations that could max the APFT Test and we had to take two, the SF Ranger PT which they could barely pass. The 3 event test is of rhe lowest standard the army has ever adopted. It is just 1 cut above the Air Force which their run is a mile & a half. The test PT Test should have combat related events, not the current spandex gentlemen's workout!

SSgt Joseph Baptist - Good to learn the USAF SF guys are fit. I know the CCT guys attached to the Unit were great bunch that could keep up with us.

LTC John Wilson; SGM Erik Marquez, to clarify, if it was unclear, my point is that the Army, like every major military organization in the world, has standards. It is my job to uphold, model, and enforce those standards so long as the officials appointed over me say so. It is most assuredly not my role to publicly bash those standards on a website. I do not think they are hard to meet, unfair, or in any way unjust to Soldiers who get out of shape, eat too much, or acquire a medical condition. For all of these, there is a program for that.
Many among us have let ourselves slip in fitness, and for them their wake up call is that first time they have to tape, fall out on a run, or struggle to finish strong on a PT Test. There is the Rubicon, and if one chooses to shrug and continue what they were doing (or not doing), then they might find themselves FLAGed or worse.

Fix yourself, if that is you. Get to work, eat better, and stop making excuses.

Having said that, in order to elaborate on what the world according to Jerry is - people often forget what the point of an APFT is, even though it is read to you in the instructions before every test. It is a commander's assessment tool, designed to give him/her the tools necessary to determine what to focus on during PT. DOING PT is a given; what you do during PT is not. Further, it allows for training to fix issues through remedial PT or ability group runs and the like. What it is often used for is a gotcha tool, which is definitely not it's purpose.

During my 24 years in the Army, there have been multiple attempts at remodeling Army Fitness Training and the APFT. Some changes were made, such as the current PRT. Others were not, even though I would concur that (with some refinement) the six event APFT tested a few years back was superior. I also recall why changes were not implemented force-wide. In a word simplicity, and to a lesser extent, equipment needed. PU/SU/2MR requires no equipment, save a stopwatch. The new APFT and the Combat Readiness Test did. Those tests still exist, and units may make use of them, but the Army-wide requirement is still the 3 event APFT that for every single currently serving Soldier save the most grizzled and ancient Warrant Officer is the only test they've ever known.

The HT/WT standards have evolved some, but not much. Most of the changes in my time have affected females the most. One could make a reasonable argument about where the line is for "fit" in terms of ht/wt or body composition. I for one think that if a Soldier can blow the table by 50 pounds and still make tape, something is wrong with either the person conducting the tape or the table itself. I would like to see the table more closely reflect what tape results should get you, if for no other reason so I don't have to tape as many Soldiers as I do.

Whatever big Army decides, I will salute smartly and adhere to and enforce those standards. At least until such time as my appointment to Sergeant Major of the Army comes through.

1SG (Join to see) - And that my Good 1SG is exactly what I took away FROM YOUR EARLIER POST.
Thanks.

LTC John Wilson - "Army policy and Doctrine changes when enough people refuse to accept an inferior status quo "just because HQDA says that is the it will be."
"refuse to accept"
Is that the way they do it in your unit Sir? Does your commander know you hold that opinion in reference to his orders? Does your BN and BDE CDR know you feel that if you disagree with their orders you will simply refuse to accept them and encourage others to do the same?
You sir have an interesting take on how the military works, Ive observed the same mindset over the years, but only in junior enlisted new to the service and those NCO and officer that have killed their own career and have nothing to lose as they will be forced out sooner rather than later.
Good day to you sir...

SGM Erik Marquez - Are you saying that one must surrender one's moral courage and integrity in order to make it to senior ranks in the US Army (e.g. E9, etc.)? Because that sounds exactly like what you're implying.

It is Mavericks that keep the US Military on the cutting edge. For example, are you familiar with Col John Boyd (USAF RET DEC). He challenged the USAF status quo, literally STOLE computer time (back in the day before the PC revolutionized how we do things and computer time was a precious resource with made its misuse a punishable offense) and proved how and why US fighter aircraft were inferior to Soviet fighters during the Vietnam era. He challenged the status of fighter design and pissed off powerful people in the Pentagon; but because he (and others like him who believed in his cause) stuck to his (their) guns, we know have the F-15, the F-16, the F/A-18, and the A-10. He was a forward thinking modern strategist that the USAF HATED...yet the USMC and (to a smaller extent) the US Army have incorporated his theories into current Maneuver Warfare doctrine.

You see, SGM Marquez, John Boyd once told his acolytes: "You gotta challenge all assumptions. If you don’t, what is doctrine on day one becomes dogma forever after.” He went on to add that any organization that is not willing to challenge the status quo is a dinosaur headed for extinction (Dogma = Inability to PROPERLY Adapt = Death). I, for one, would not care to see an organization that I've put a lot of blood, sweat, and tears into get sucked it to the Labret Tar Pits of institutional inertia, SGM. Perhaps you are?

My Army's mission SGM Marquez, is to fight and win this nation's wars. It is my duty to do whatever I can to ensure that we train and prepare Soldiers to do just that. And there is compelling evidence from the medical and physical fitness community to say that the way we train and test for Physical Fitness is 180-degrees out of phase with what we SHOULD be doing to prepare Solders for Combat. We are putting Soldier's out of the Army -- soldier's we've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to recruit and train -- based on a cheap, deeply flawed and grossly inaccurate measure of what is "healthy."

Boyd made enemies fighting for what he knew was right. He was ultimately passed over for promotion to general. Although disappointed, he was proud of the course he had chosen to make his service better. When he had gotten to the crossroad where institutional success and doing the right thing diverge, he chose to do what was right. It was a philosophy he would espouse to those he mentored as they weighed whether to work for him and help do something important, but have their careers retarded for the association, or to keep their nose down and work their way up the ranks.

“Tiger,” he would say, “one day you will come to a fork in the road: And you’re going to have to make a decision about which direction you want to go.” He raised his hand and pointed. “If you go that way you can be somebody. You will have to make compromises and you will have to turn your back on your friends. But you will be a member of the club and you will get promoted and you will get good assignments.” Then Boyd raised his other hand and pointed another direction. “Or you can go that way and you can do something — something for your country and for your Air Force and for yourself. If you decide you want to do something, you may not get promoted and you may not get the good assignments and you certainly will not be a favorite of your superiors. But you won’t have to compromise yourself. You will be true to your friends and to yourself. And your work might make a difference. To be somebody or to do something. In life there is often a roll call. That’s when you will have to make a decision. To be or to do? Which way will you go?”

Based on your commentary directed at me, I think I know which way you've chosen.

Good day.

SFC Dr. Joseph Finck, BS, MA, DSS - In actuality, testing done in 2013 showed that the Tape Test is grossly inaccurate, indicating -- in 9 out of 10 cases -- that the tape overstated the amount of bodyfat by 15% to 66% of the more accurate hydrostatic tests.

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/archives/2013/05/21/experts-tape-test-has-huge-margin-of-error/78539504/

LTC John Wilson - I agree that there are more accurate methods, but the tape is probably the most portable.

Is it was up to me, I would continue to use it as a screening method, but require a more accurate method for those who fail the screening before any actin is taken. But I bet this would over burden such facilities, and be especially difficult to implement for the reserve /NG components.

1SG (Join to see) - I would urge you to look at my post (below) which starts: "The 'physical appearance' mantra is a lame excuse that maintains an irrelevant stereotype and props up an inaccurate measurement of Soldier performance." Then read through the thread that follows. You have to get out of the paradigm that body composition is a Company-level "Commander's" program. Obesity is a MEDICAL issue and should be measured as part of the Soldier's PHA. If the Soldier has an issue with it, then Medical and Dietary professionals should help. If the Soldier CANNOT achieve a reasonable body composition, then they should be MEDICALLY boarded out.

Once it's PROPERLY placed in the competent hands of the medical professionals, the cost to quickly and accurately measure body fat is reasonable compared the sunken costs of recruiting and training a Soldier lost to the Army because of an over zealous and undertrained Senior NCO with a measuring tape and a grossly inaccurate "screening" methodology.

passed apft marine regs, was over weight, but taped out clean 10%, at that time 5'8" 210 pounds

LTC John Wilson - The APFT and USMC PFT aren't measures of Combat Fitness though. Aren't designed to be. If they were, we'd run them in boots and fatigues. They are (bad) measures of HEALTH. The USMC acknowledged this when they developed the supplemental CFT (Combat Fitness Test).

As for the number of personnel capable of maxing the tests... The USMC has a long standard of not letting Officers in until they can get into the high 285 range (out of 300).

I don't disagree with many of your comments, but we're talking about going after sacred cows when we even look at modifying the PF program.

I was referring to the USMC Combat Fitness Test which is a far better measure of Combat Fitness than the APFT (look up the British Army test as well...both are a better measure of function strength and power.

While you may disagree with me, the latest science is proving my position superior.

And as I believe Mark Twain once quipped: "Sacred Cows make the best hamburgers."

More specific to this thread, the APFT is a poor test of WHAT REALLY counts. Additionally, the way the Army determines ideal height/weight, body composition is grossly in accurate, unfair, and equally irrelevant to what matters most -- fighting and winning the nation's wars. Worse than irrelevant, both are counterproductive to the Army's mission.

LTC John Wilson - Never said I disagreed. Actually said "I don't disagree" and that the "(A)PFT are not necessarily indicative of overall fitness either." I've long held that the Military PFT's are bad metrics, because we use them for the wrong things.

As a matter of fact, here's an article published last year regarding my views on it:

http://ncojournal.dodlive.mil/2016/10/26/is-physical-fitness-overvalued-in-the-army/

I completely agree with you and have been saying that for years!! I've seen some great aircraft maintainers lose their careers due to fitness. Albeit, it is important and part of the job... However, when the military puts more emphasis on PT than actual job performance, we all suffer. Specifically on the flight line where superior maintainers are pushed out and so-so maintainers are great at PT but just "ok" at turning wrenches.

Maj Carter, your comment about the tape test not being studied to the level it should be is, in my opinion incorrect. Every CGSC class since the beginning of time has had a paper written about the tape test. The highest levels of command are well aware of the issue, they are also aware of the cost involved with adopting an alternative. The only real solution would be a water submersion test which is not really field expedient. Every solder who is subject to being discharged based on tape tests can request this more accurate measure of a persons body fat. It is a fundamental failure of that solders command to not make them aware of this alternative, but like I said, extra paperwork and cost is not always the field expedient solution.

Not if he's falling out.